[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-2629?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12851636#action_12851636
]
Jakob Korherr commented on MYFACES-2629:
----------------------------------------
I think it would be the best if you'd write an email to [email protected]
and describe your particular case, so that the JSF 2.0 expert group and we can
come up with a long term solution to this problem. I don't think that it should
be your goal to use "private" MyFaces and Mojarra implementation classes in
order to make your code work, because if our implementation code or Mojarra's
implementation code changes by any reason (and this happens a lot), you will
have to change your code too - and I am sure that this will cause lots of
problems and will be totally annoying. Furthermore it could be possible that
other projects, which are similar to Gracelets, will also have to use a custom
FaceletContext.
So we all should think about how this problem can be addressed in the best way
and get some documentation about it into the JSF specification - and the
[email protected] mailing list and also the spec issue tracker are the best
ways to do so!
> Accept abstract FaceletContext, do not force AbstractFaceletContext
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MYFACES-2629
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MYFACES-2629
> Project: MyFaces Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: General, JSR-314
> Affects Versions: 2.0.0-beta-3
> Environment: Tomcat 6.0+, MyFaces 2.0.0-beta3 API/Impl.
> Reporter: Lewis Gass
> Assignee: Leonardo Uribe
>
> I am the main coder on the Gracelets project
> (http://gracelets.sourceforge.net/) and have recently began integration of
> Groovy with JSF 2.0. In order for Gracelets to harness the already existing
> Facelets libraries it needs access to the TagLibrary class and the actual
> libraries loaded by the JSF 2.0 implementation. Since that library is not
> part of the JSF 2.0 public API, I have to write an extension for each
> different JSF 2.0 implementation in order to load them. I have been able to
> successfully integrate with the SUN RI with minimal code. However, in MyFaces
> Core implementation this code appears on line 135 of the
> org.apache.myfaces.view.facelets.tag.jsf.ComponentTagHandlerDelegate:
> AbstractFaceletContext actx = (AbstractFaceletContext) ctx;
> Gracelets has its own FaceletContext (which is part of the public API) in
> order to mimimize integration between different JSF 2.0 implementations.
> Since in MyFaces this is forced to be a particular sub class here, it breaks
> portability. Is there anyway this can be avoided?
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
